Pro Audio Folklore

[G|force]

It's kind of appalling how many people, even seasoned pros over on the Gearslutz Err Gearspace forum believe they are immune to bias, especially confirmation bias.

 

[ThatSoundsGood]

All compressors sound different. All limiters sound different. All true peak limiters sound different. Mixing consoles sound different.

Are you saying that these are myths?

 

[Curvature]

Are you saying that these are myths?

See what I wrote a few posts above. True peak limiters are the most unlikely to have any audible signature.

 

[ThatSoundsGood]

See what I wrote a few posts above. True peak limiters are the most unlikely to have any audible signature.

That's fair about true peak limiters. But compressors and consoles all sound different. If I understand your other comments though, you're saying that it's not a mystery and we can measure that. I was just confused about the idea that consoles and compressors don't sound different.

 

[Curvature]

That's fair about true peak limiters. But compressors and consoles all sound different. If I understand your other comments though, you're saying that it's not a mystery and we can measure that. I was just confused about the idea that consoles and compressors don't sound different.

You know what's often repeated here? If the gear is within its operative range, it doesn't have defects, it's not clipping, there's no special processing, it will not have a sound.

I would bet that between compressors there is a wide range of possible settings where the sound is more or less identical.

 

[ThatSoundsGood]

You know what's often repeated here? If the gear is within its operative range, it doesn't have defects, it's not clipping, there's no special processing, it will not have a sound.

I'm honestly confused. Do you mean to say that there is not difference in the sound of a Neve console VS. an SSL console if they are both operating within spec? Or are you saying that we can measure the differences in sound?

I would bet that between compressors there is a wide range of possible settings where the sound is more or less identical.

Sure, but there are different types of compressors with different circuits and they operate quite differently (FET, Opto, VCA, etc.). Are you saying that it's just a myth and a product of psychoacoustics that we hear a difference and prefer an LA2A on vocals? Would you think that you can get an 1176 to sound the same as an LA2A? I'm honestly trying to understand you here. Is your point that we can just have one compressor and manipulate its settings on every instrument and we can get the desired outcome; that the preference is just psychoacoustic?

 

[Curvature]

I'm honestly confused. Do you mean to say that there is not difference in the sound of a Neve console VS. an SSL console if they are both operating within spec? Or are you saying that we can measure the differences in sound?

Sure, but there are different types of compressors with different circuits and they operate quite differently (FET, Opto, VCA, etc.). Are you saying that it's just a myth and a product of psychoacoustics that we hear a difference and prefer an LA2A on vocals? Would you think that you can get an 1176 to sound the same as an LA2A? I'm honestly trying to understand you here. Is your point that we can just have one compressor and manipulate its settings on every instrument and we can get the desired outcome; that the preference is just psychoacoustic?

What matters is what goes into the input and what comes out of the output. Compressors have a basic collection of settings like threshold when it kicks in, the ratio of compression, the knee for the transition from raw to uncompressed audio, attack and release time and pre and post gain. They will have a range in dB where they can process the signal without saturating. So, what I'm saying is, if you can line up the settings and you aren't overdriving anything, then the sound should be the same.

Every other playback device that we discuss regularly on ASR is subject to the same line of thinking. What matters is the result and conditions for getting a particular result. The innards and topology of each piece of gear matter only to the extent we are trying to evaluate how that result was achieved.

 

[ThatSoundsGood]

What matters is what goes into the input and what comes out of the output. Compressors have a basic collection of settings like threshold when it kicks in, the ratio of compression, the knee for the transition from raw to uncompressed audio, attack and release time and pre and post gain. They will have a range in dB where they can process the signal without saturating. So, what I'm saying is, if you can line up the settings and you aren't overdriving anything, then the sound should be the same.

OK, but to clarify further, do you think that it doesn't matter what compressor is used? Is the difference just a myth? Can we get an LA2A and 1176 to do the same job no matter what the input and desired output are?

Every other playback device that we discuss regularly on ASR is subject to the same line of thinking. What matters is the result and conditions for getting a particular result. The innards and topology of each piece of gear matter only to the extent we are trying to evaluate how that result was achieved.

Is there a difference in the Pro Audio Studio world and Hifi world though? For me, Hifi and monitoring is all about low distortion and accurate monitoring; staying tru to the source. Pro Audio is about adding saturation, distortion, effects, etc. to get the desired result. To clarify: this would be for rock, metal, pop, hip-hop, etc. I think classical and maybe even most of jazz would be different as we would try to recreate the source more accurately so it would often fall closer to the approach to hifi (though may sounds tale and boring).

 

[Curvature]

OK, but to clarify further, do you think that it doesn't matter what compressor is used? Is the difference just a myth? Can we get an LA2A and 1176 to do the same job no matter what the input and desired output are?

I can't answer that. Maybe. Extensive measurements are required to have a worthwhile opinion on that sort of thing. I would guess that they can do the same job.

Is there a difference in the Pro Audio Studio world and Hifi world though? For me, Hifi and monitoring is all about low distortion and accurate monitoring; staying tru to the source. Pro Audio is about adding saturation, distortion, effects, etc. to get the desired result. To clarify: this would be for rock, metal, pop, hip-hop, etc. I think classical and maybe even most of jazz would be different as we would try to recreate the source more accurately so it would often fall closer to the approach to hifi (though may sounds tale and boring).

The jobs of speakers, amps, preamps, patchbays, digital and analog sources is to transmit the signal. Low distortion is the name of the game.

The other devices do exactly what you say, but it really depends on artistic vision there. Everything sounds good as long as it sounds good. Distorted, undistorted, whatever. A certain degree of skill is involved in choosing.

This is an example where a signal chain was pushed to extremes to create highly creative and unpredictable results.

 

[Curvature]

I think there is a certain fantasy shared by audiophiles and pros alike, which is that they have far more control over sound than they are willing to admit.

 

[Chr1]

Bit of a sweeping generalisation surely?

Also, not quite sure what qualifies as "control over sound"?

There are a lot of extremely knowledgeable sound engineers and producers out there.

 

[Curvature]

Bit of a sweeping generalisation surely?

Also, not quite sure what qualifies as "control over sound"?

There are a lot of extremely knowledgeable sound engineers and producers out there.

My comment is about psychology. Put yourself in the head of someone who is skillful but not informed about human perception.

 

[ThatSoundsGood]

I can't answer that. Maybe. Extensive measurements are required to have a worthwhile opinion on that sort of thing. I would guess that they can do the same job.

They don't. They are completely different compressors with totally different circuitry and it's pretty much impossible to get one to act like the other. That's why there are so many different choices with compression.

The jobs of speakers, amps, preamps, patchbays, digital and analog sources is to transmit the signal. Low distortion is the name of the game.

Have you ever worked in Pro Audio? Low distortion is not the name of the game.

The other devices do exactly what you say, but it really depends on artistic vision there. Everything sounds good as long as it sounds good. Distorted, undistorted, whatever. A certain degree of skill is involved in choosing.

But I thought low distortion was the name of the game? I'm really confused by your comments. I'm not trying to be antagonistic but you just said two opposing comments.

 

[Ifrit]

Patchbay with 2 percent distortion... what a concept. "Have you ever worked in Pro Audio?" ©

 

[tengiz]

I've got another one - I think it qualifies as folklore: back in the 2000s, a pro audio veteran told me that a PWM Class D amplifier was only good for driving stepper motors. It came up in the context of a conversation about a new, cool PCM-to-PWM power DAC architecture called Equibit.

 

[tengiz]

Well one thing that's clear is that many tend never to have looked seriously at psychoacoustics. Even current pros and acousticians.

I’m not a pro myself, but I avoided psychoacoustics for a long time too, for completely stupid reasons.

When I was younger - and much more arrogant, thanks in part to my alma mater, which drilled into us that we were the best and brightest, trained in every important facet of physics, mathematics, and engineering, and ready to tackle any problem - I remember coming across psychoacoustically smoothed frequency response graphs and thinking, Is this a joke? I could come up with something more rigorous.

 

[Curvature]

I've been busy for a while.

They don't. They are completely different compressors with totally different circuitry and it's pretty much impossible to get one to act like the other. That's why there are so many different choices with compression.

Do rulers of different materials, wood, metal, plastic, have different centimeters?

You can't assume differences about circuity without evidence. That's why I said measurements are necessary. How different is a 4:1 ratio supposed to be across compressors? Are we supposed to assume some kind of incompetence in design which means that the engineer cannot trust the settings on the device? A threshold of -20dB is actually some other figure?

Have you ever worked in Pro Audio? Low distortion is not the name of the game.

20 years around the edges. Never as a career. And, also, why would you want high distortion in speakers and other playback gear?

But I thought low distortion was the name of the game? I'm really confused by your comments. I'm not trying to be antagonistic but you just said two opposing comments.

There is gear for monitoring the signal (playback), and there is gear for manipulating sound (production). Have you ever worked in pro audio? (Rhetorical question; you don't have to answer.)

It comes down to this: I'd like to see evidence. What was demonstrated across many, many pieces of electronic gear through measurements (that the majority, where competent, do not audibly impact the signal) is also likely true for productions gear, too. On the other hand, the farther into history we go, the more we are likely to see reactive interactions from analog tube or old solid state gear with high or inconsistent output impedance. Hard to say. But then, in that case, it's not the gear that sounds different, it's an unpredictable error in gear interactions. Same goes for a lot of analog equipment. Many of the joys of vinyl, outside of all of the mechanical issues, come from frequency response changes from unclear or inconsistent loading.

 

[Palmer]

I've been busy for a while.

Do rulers of different materials, wood, metal, plastic, have different centimeters?

You can't assume differences about circuity without evidence. That's why I said measurements are necessary. How different is a 4:1 ratio supposed to be across compressors? Are we supposed to assume some kind of incompetence in design which means that the engineer cannot trust the settings on the device? A threshold of -20dB is actually some other figure?

20 years around the edges. Never as a career. And, also, why would you want high distortion in speakers and other playback gear?

There is gear for monitoring the signal (playback), and there is gear for manipulating sound (production). Have you ever worked in pro audio? (Rhetorical question; you don't have to answer.)

It comes down to this: I'd like to see evidence. What was demonstrated across many, many pieces of electronic gear through measurements (that the majority, where competent, do not audibly impact the signal) is also likely true for productions gear, too. On the other hand, the farther into history we go, the more we are likely to see reactive interactions from analog tube or old solid state gear with high or inconsistent output impedance. Hard to say. But then, in that case, it's not the gear that sounds different, it's an unpredictable error in gear interactions. Same goes for a lot of analog equipment. Many of the joys of vinyl, outside of all of the mechanical issues, come from frequency response changes from unclear or inconsistent loading.

I - respectfully - disagree. Having no evidence at hand, for the time being - and spending quite a good amount of thought on making a statement on this topic - I feel I would have wasted a bit of my 25 years in the field, if I would duck this one out. My time in the purely recording and mixing studios was not that long, compared to the broadcast world, radio and even the film world - but I can tell you this, I will always be grateful to the, back then very difficult to reach, chance at getting to work with these incredible pieces of equipment.

The consoles : I have worked, recording - and some mixing, on a CADAC custom console, at the long gone Union Studios in the suburbs of Munich.
It had an air, that was different than, say the Neve consoles in the RCA building in LA, or, I shall say lack of - the SSL 4000 E and G, or the Harrison or Trident.
I only worked on the SSL 4000's , never on the 6k, or anything after - but that console needs gain, a lot of it - or it sounds clinical, sort of a plastic, dull sheen on the sound - Peter Gabriel found out, but not at first. Those in the know, know... I have the Soundcraft Series 200 that was used on all the ADR work for Miami Vice, the original series, in Miami - my boss let me have it, when the original business dissolved. Does not even remotely sound like the Mackie that I had to use after, not my favorite, definitely not a Neve or an SSL, but you plug a Milab condenser into it, and it beats the heck out of consoles way more expensive than that old lady cost back then, remarkable...

I have bought a pricey Eventide H 3000 about 2 years ago - I worked on one in the ADR and Voice Over studio in Miami for several years, no Pro Tools - and even though
I don't really do recording anymore, I missed it... With my Lexicon reverb and a couple of Valley People Kepexes, I can re-create Phil Collins In the Air tonight like it is meant to be. Ableton, plug-ins and the like, just don't get there. Close, sometimes very close, but never quite. Compressors are just like that, UREI sounds different than Summit, sounds different than SSL - Chris Lord Alge is proven to be a guy to set it and forget it, being able to afford it, he has a lot of them, each one for the output he desires.

In other words, while one can measure things, these days way better than back then- there is a gap between measurement and the things that you can hear, this seems to be uncomfortable for some folks, I get that. But the things that make ones hairs stand up, when listening on a dedicated system, heck even on a not that great system are real, pretty hard to create - and the approach that anyone can create, or copy these on their DAW - has made a lot of what comes out today all sound the same, at least to me.

This may of course sound silly, or embellished, but some of us guys, and gals, where there when it went through these components, and we, to this day - prefer to use the gear that gets the right sound, for the right material. If this, again - sounds contrived to some, unbelievable, made-up - my apologies, it gets into your blood, and that's that.

Best I can do for now, life presents it's own challenges, Lord knows - if I can somehow get around to it, and my hearing stays at the approximately 15.4 kHz it still is -
I'll make an effort to somehow provide evidence. I appreciate it.

 

[Curvature]

I - respectfully - disagree. Having no evidence at hand, for the time being - and spending quite a good amount of thought on making a statement on this topic - I feel I would have wasted a bit of my 25 years in the field, if I would duck this one out. My time in the purely recording and mixing studios was not that long, compared to the broadcast world, radio and even the film world - but I can tell you this, I will always be grateful to the, back then very difficult to reach, chance at getting to work with these incredible pieces of equipment.

The consoles : I have worked, recording - and some mixing, on a CADAC custom console, at the long gone Union Studios in the suburbs of Munich.
It had an air, that was different than, say the Neve consoles in the RCA building in LA, or, I shall say lack of - the SSL 4000 E and G, or the Harrison or Trident.
I only worked on the SSL 4000's , never on the 6k, or anything after - but that console needs gain, a lot of it - or it sounds clinical, sort of a plastic, dull sheen on the sound - Peter Gabriel found out, but not at first. Those in the know, know... I have the Soundcraft Series 200 that was used on all the ADR work for Miami Vice, the original series, in Miami - my boss let me have it, when the original business dissolved. Does not even remotely sound like the Mackie that I had to use after, not my favorite, definitely not a Neve or an SSL, but you plug a Milab condenser into it, and it beats the heck out of consoles way more expensive than that old lady cost back then, remarkable...

I have bought a pricey Eventide H 3000 about 2 years ago - I worked on one in the ADR and Voice Over studio in Miami for several years, no Pro Tools - and even though
I don't really do recording anymore, I missed it... With my Lexicon reverb and a couple of Valley People Kepexes, I can re-create Phil Collins In the Air tonight like it is meant to be. Ableton, plug-ins and the like, just don't get there. Close, sometimes very close, but never quite. Compressors are just like that, UREI sounds different than Summit, sounds different than SSL - Chris Lord Alge is proven to be a guy to set it and forget it, being able to afford it, he has a lot of them, each one for the output he desires.

In other words, while one can measure things, these days way better than back then- there is a gap between measurement and the things that you can hear, this seems to be uncomfortable for some folks, I get that. But the things that make ones hairs stand up, when listening on a dedicated system, heck even on a not that great system are real, pretty hard to create - and the approach that anyone can create, or copy these on their DAW - has made a lot of what comes out today all sound the same, at least to me.

This may of course sound silly, or embellished, but some of us guys, and gals, where there when it went through these components, and we, to this day - prefer to use the gear that gets the right sound, for the right material. If this, again - sounds contrived to some, unbelievable, made-up - my apologies, it gets into your blood, and that's that.

Best I can do for now, life presents it's own challenges, Lord knows - if I can somehow get around to it, and my hearing stays at the approximately 15.4 kHz it still is -
I'll make an effort to somehow provide evidence. I appreciate it.

I really appreciate your reply. That said I've heard this kind of thing for as long as I've been around audio. I used to assume without much thought that it was all true, and that good sound was magic.

I don't have any decent rebuttals other than to say that without someone doing serious work with comparative measurements the situation will remain murky.

If you actually have two versions of In the Air Tonight we can compare them using measurements, but I suspect you are only making a rhetorical point.

 

[ThatSoundsGood]

I've been busy for a while.

Do rulers of different materials, wood, metal, plastic, have different centimeters?

You can't assume differences about circuity without evidence. That's why I said measurements are necessary. How different is a 4:1 ratio supposed to be across compressors? Are we supposed to assume some kind of incompetence in design which means that the engineer cannot trust the settings on the device? A threshold of -20dB is actually some other figure?

I completely support the need for measurements in general. But it's also important to understand that different compressors operate completely differently. They don't all have the ability to adjust the ratio, attack, release, knee, etc. They have different ways of detecting the signal coming in (opto vs FET for example) and they respond to the signal differently. Some compressors (SSL console for example) have a variable attack that changes depending on the amplitude of the input.
So, a 4:1 ratio should always be the same in a compressor if the circuitry is the same. There's no incompetence in design, but there are many limitations in the parameters that we can control in many of these compressors. So, they don't all do the same thing because they have different circuitry and different ways of manipulating parameters based on their design and that's what makes them so unique for specific jobs.

20 years around the edges. Never as a career. And, also, why would you want high distortion in speakers and other playback gear?

Maybe I misspoke here. I don't want distortion in any playback gear. I want low distortion, flat frequency response (some bass boost but generally flat) clean and accurate monitoring for hifi and studio listening. The only place for distortion (for me) is in the production phase.

There is gear for monitoring the signal (playback), and there is gear for manipulating sound (production). Have you ever worked in pro audio? (Rhetorical question; you don't have to answer.)

I have worked in Pro Audio for 25 years.

It comes down to this: I'd like to see evidence. What was demonstrated across many, many pieces of electronic gear through measurements (that the majority, where competent, do not audibly impact the signal) is also likely true for productions gear, too. On the other hand, the farther into history we go, the more we are likely to see reactive interactions from analog tube or old solid state gear with high or inconsistent output impedance. Hard to say. But then, in that case, it's not the gear that sounds different, it's an unpredictable error in gear interactions.

This is a likely situation. I'm sure there are all kinds of mismatched impedances in the output and input stages. I will say though, that measurements would easily show how different thee compressors are. But we don't really need the measurements because many of us have used this gear a lot and we know how different the units are. We also know that on a basic level, you don't have the ability to manipulate all of the parameters on them (the LA2A compressor only has input, Gain Reduction and a switch to go from compressor to limiter).
I totally support the idea of measurements and the need to show the differences. I also agree that there are many myths in pro audio. I watch people's brains trick them into thinking something sounds better all of the time. They love PA systems with distortion and they mix by looking at a screen rather than listening to the result.

Same goes for a lot of analog equipment. Many of the joys of vinyl, outside of all of the mechanical issues, come from frequency response changes from unclear or inconsistent loading.

That's for sure. That's why it will sound good on one song but not the next. It's the never ending quest for "the perfect sound" that doesn't exist because people don't know if the result is coming from their playback system or the original production.